Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 194
  1. #1
    Commandant Come-quickly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    2,753
    Post Thanks / Like

    Light fighters

    While I realise that this is purely academic, what fighter aircraft currently available or in final development would be an acceptable option for Ireland to operate, on cost and maintenance grounds I'm asking you to restrict it to lightweight types, (this is jus tone of those threads to help me argue my pro defence spending arguments a little better. and because I'm bored)

    What comes to mind for me is the following selection:
    F-5S/T Showing their age but at least as capable and durable as the Mig-21BIS, going at around E9m at the moment, this would be my choice if we suddenly turned into a nation non cowards overnight and needed something in the next 3 years.
    In the slightly more realistic (slightly) case of fighters being considered at the end of a 7-10 year regeneration project at Baldonnel, I'd look at the F-5s likely successor the M-346 and the two seat/trainer MB-346,
    other options that spring to mind are the KAI T-50 (more expensive) MAKO about which I know nothing and Hawk 200, which is awfully expensive for a converted trainer with a bunch of extra avionics stuffed in the back seat and nose.

    Go nuts
    "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

  2. #2
    6-40509-04014-7 yooklid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Right behind you.....
    Posts
    2,921
    Post Thanks / Like
    Can we look at traditional non-suppliers? (China et al.) Also, can we consider cast offs?
    Meh.

  3. #3
    Sqdn. Ldr Silver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    449
    Post Thanks / Like
    For a "real world" fighter/intercept capability we should go for refurbished F-5 's.
    I used to be a avid supporter of the L-159 for the AC but I think the F-5 would be the better of the two.

    What life expectancy could we expect from refurbished F-5's (20yrs plus - as with the Fougas) ?

  4. #4
    6-40509-04014-7 yooklid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Right behind you.....
    Posts
    2,921
    Post Thanks / Like
    What is our hypothetical budget?????

    I think that F-5's are on the way out at this point. I would rather not supply the Air Corps with something designed in the 50s!
    Meh.

  5. #5
    Brigadier General
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    moving rapidly away.......
    Posts
    2,607
    Post Thanks / Like
    I'd have to stick in the the KIA/Lockheed-Martin Talon T-50. Apart from that, the independent fighter from R.O.C. looks too heavy and they have had a lot of problems with it.
    I heard from somewhere that Casa were looking into a new improved Aviojet, but that was a while ago, don't know if there is anything happening with that, anyway it would not be much of an improvment on the PC-9M.
    There is a lot of merit in the F-5E option but the possablity of 20 years plus sounds a bit dodgey, even if upgrades were contracted [unlikely-the ******* we get for politicans are not known for foresight]
    IMO, there would be little possablity in anything from China being considerd.
    "We will hold out until our last bullet is spent. Could do with some whiskey"
    Radio transmission, siege of Jadotville DR Congo. September 1961.
    Illegitimi non carborundum

  6. #6
    Brigadier General
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    moving rapidly away.......
    Posts
    2,607
    Post Thanks / Like
    Yooklid,could you get hold of the AMARC inventory,without getting into trouble,it's been removed from their website for security reasons.
    If there is any posablity of getting F-5E's thats where, more than likely,they would be got from.
    If you can't get the inventory, a list of available F-5E's would be worth looking at:flagwave: .
    "We will hold out until our last bullet is spent. Could do with some whiskey"
    Radio transmission, siege of Jadotville DR Congo. September 1961.
    Illegitimi non carborundum

  7. #7
    6-40509-04014-7 yooklid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Right behind you.....
    Posts
    2,921
    Post Thanks / Like
    I am a big fan of westernised ex-soviet hardware. Plenty of options, especially with IAI out there doing all these upgrades. Any takers?
    Meh.

  8. #8
    Brigadier General
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    moving rapidly away.......
    Posts
    2,607
    Post Thanks / Like
    Daft as it may seem, one of the things that has to be considerd for a future jet aircraft is the phyical size of the aircraft, in relation to the infrastructure at Bal'.
    This alone kills off several ex-USSR types.
    Of course when it comes to facilities for bertie's air taxie's; well that's a whole other matter!!!!
    "We will hold out until our last bullet is spent. Could do with some whiskey"
    Radio transmission, siege of Jadotville DR Congo. September 1961.
    Illegitimi non carborundum

  9. #9
    6-40509-04014-7 yooklid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Right behind you.....
    Posts
    2,921
    Post Thanks / Like
    Maybe... Got to love those MiG 29s though.....

    Y
    Meh.

  10. #10
    Closed Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Villa Straylight
    Posts
    2,082
    Post Thanks / Like
    No you don't, they suck ...

    Before asking the question C-Q, lets hear your mission for these aircraft. Are they to be deployable? What level of force are they expected to provide defence against? From what direction? A2A or A2G? Out to what range? Alone or 'with a little help from our friends'?

    Once we have that, then we really start to exercise our imaginations ...

  11. #11
    Commandant Come-quickly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    2,753
    Post Thanks / Like
    FFS, try and make a bit of small talk, I think most people would accept that a minimal intercept capability and CAS/SA training would be the extent of our realistic air defence.
    You'll note that the F-5 is the largest aircraft I've mentioned (except possibly for the T-50 which might be around the same dimensions), The M-346 is athe result of a joint development between Aermaachi and Yakolev.
    Furthermore the M-346, F-5, adn Mako offer excellent performance at low operating costs (I don't know about the Hawk 200, T-50 is currenty being pushed for single seat development but the two seater is apparently quit e the performer.)

    Aidan: All we could really hope for in air defence is to be able to scramble and challenge intruders I think I'd question the sanity of any pilot who sought to take on a threat on his own when there are Tornados/Typhoons nearby and willing to help.
    Although I've always been taken with the image of Irish F-5s flying alongside RAF Tornados kind of Symbolic...would give Tornado's a much better close in protection than hawks ( Tornado is pretty fkd if anything of an F-16 class gets in close) would make for good joint training.

    Turkey: Bahrain took the last ever new build F-5 deliveries in 1985 and have all but retired them, the tried to sell them to another GCC country a few years ago but they asked too high a price.
    "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

  12. #12
    Sqdn. Ldr Silver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    449
    Post Thanks / Like
    Funny you should mention joint Air Corps/RAF jet operations, I have thought of the same thing in the past.
    Would be a great sight all the same !

    Currently, the nearest we get to that is joint (?) SAR training with RAF/RN helis.

    Come-quickly,
    What F-5's are currently available that you know of ?
    Swiss examples ? AMARC examples only ? Other ? Prices ?

  13. #13
    Closed Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Villa Straylight
    Posts
    2,082
    Post Thanks / Like
    "All we could really hope for in air defence is to be able to scramble and challenge intruders I think I'd question the sanity of any pilot who sought to take on a threat on his own when there are Tornados/Typhoons nearby and willing to help."

    Y'see, right there, I think you've answered your own question.

    While, for a bundle of reasons, I'd like to see jet aircraft in IAC colours, I really don't think we can justify the purchase of 'light fighters' on any grounds other than national pride. The simple fact of the matter is that they offer very little military ability. They are simply too slow and lack the avionics fit to be of any practical use for 'territorial defence' in and of itself. And they are not deployable.

    Again, the baseline has to be a supersonic fighter (even dash only) with BVR radar and missiles, and pgm ability for strike. So 16blk40, F/A18C, Gripen, is where the game begins now. Light fighters are not fighters. They are what third world countries buy when they can't afford the real thing.

    Other European states of a comparable size to us tend to have legacy forces of fighter aircraft which they are now struggling to justify when its becoming clear that bringing 10-20 F-16s to the fight is nowhere near as important as bringing a Infantry/Mech Brigade, and the ability to support it with airlift. Particularly in the context of the RRF.

    If we were having this discussion twenty years ago, I've a funny feeling I'd be making a strong argument for F/A-18s, with Hawks for LIFT (like the Finns eventually did). In this alternative universe, we could well have ended up with Sepcat Jaguars, Mirage F-1 or Vought A-7s as low cost strikers with an emphasis on the antiship role, but what the hey. Then there was a clear and present threat to this states territorial integrity. Now there really isn't, not in any realistic timeframe.

    So my answer to your question would be not to bite, but to invest instead in building the army up to the point where it could deploy a number of battalions, or perhaps even a full brigade (with C4i, arty, armour, ADA and medium lift heli) for a short time. And sustain them while away with our own transport assets, air and naval.

    (Now, hands up, who's surprised at my position? :D)

    Although, stepping into the realms of fantasy for a moment ...

    Were we to find ourselves in a position where we felt the pressing need to defend our sacred neutrality by force all by ourselves (what a mad idea!), and that we needed our own multirole strike fighters to do so, I'd go with a Northrop design alright, just not the F-5. In the early 1970s, when it became clear that the lightweight fighter competition for the USAF was where the next major batch of NATO sales was going to come from, Northrops designers stood back from the F-5 and its big brother, the F-20 Tigershark, and realised they needed to do better. They came up with the YF-17. After that lost the USAF end of the comp to the YF-16, the USN came calling and between them they redesigned it to the F/A-18. Its got two engines (!), a serious radar, BVR missiles, the C model can carry more or less all the ordnance types in the US inventory and plenty that isn't. The Finns, Australians and Swiss have all found it to be an excellent land based fighter. That'd be my suggestion.*

    *There are about 30 old 18A models at Amarc available for upgrade

  14. #14
    Private 3*
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    49
    Post Thanks / Like
    True enough, but while Ireland could never hope to defend its airspace against an aggressive well equipped threat. That scenario is hardly likely. There's nobody waiting offshore getting ready to invade Ireland. A bit like there's nobody waiting to invade Denmark or Belgium etc.

    However, the Irish Air Corps should have some form of CAP capability. The ability to patrol and enforce air exclusion zones from the smallest of threats. Say, pranksters who want to buzz a Euro summit in a Cessna. Right now, we can't do that. Though PC9ms may fulfill that most basic of roles. And even were no clear and present exists, the basic capability should be there. The gardai will put a security cordon - does anyone say "ah sure who'e going to bother attacking the summit?"

    Aircraft capable of escorting a civlilian airliner. Before anyone goes on about airliners belting along at 500mph - yes that would be the case at full pelt. The 9/11 hijackers were certainly giving them the welly and scrambled F-16 could not intercept. But at normal crusing speed, or even reduced speed, a captain could call on us for visual inspections of what he suspects is a damaged aircraft.

    OK, VIP flypasts. Why not? We can't even do that right now. Look at the Bremen flypast. Embarrassing.

    Army co-op. Training infantry on working with overhead jets.

    And then there are the obvious domestic targets. - We all know what they are. Important foreign diplomatic and industrial targets. One in particular stands out. Stand by light combat aircraft at Baldonnel would get there a lot quicker than any supersonic aircraft from the UK.

    The anti €1m Aero L-39ZA people should remember, the Czech airforce currently has them deployed protecting an air exclusion zone around that country's nuclear power plants.

  15. #15
    Brigadier General
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    moving rapidly away.......
    Posts
    2,607
    Post Thanks / Like
    The whole point about air-defence is that we cannot, without massive expenditure,[we are talking 50-60 billion€ here] defend this country against air-born attack.
    But we do not have to!
    In the event of a massive slide in world conditions to a world war suitation, we would have ample warning to start running off and buying F/A- 18's and get them operational, but only if the basic requirment is there, the foundation of a fighter based defence system, such as existed with the Vampires and to a far less extent with those flyin' abortions, the Fougas.
    What a token force of say 12-16 F-5E's provide is the building blocks to a war-time defence force; the culture of air-defence, without which we could find ourselves with a very short future as a nation in the event of things going down the tubes.
    But fighters, even light ones such as F-5's/T-50's/ Mako ect. provide this and also something more. They also provide an essential peace-time security,without which we do leave ourselves open to aggression, no matter which country is next door, who will after all be concerned with their own security first, and will not be thanked by over-burdened tax-payers for provideing a charitable form of air-defence to a quite well off country, that is too lazy and pig-ignorant to supply it's own
    "We will hold out until our last bullet is spent. Could do with some whiskey"
    Radio transmission, siege of Jadotville DR Congo. September 1961.
    Illegitimi non carborundum

  16. #16
    Commandant Come-quickly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    2,753
    Post Thanks / Like
    It goes back to the issue of why have the army if akk it does is clean up after (or hopefully during) other peoples wars, when there is no domestic threat to security for the last 7 years I've had to listen to people arguing that the army should be disbanded and we could never defend oursleves since we were neutral (never understood how that logic worked), the simple answer I give most of the time is this try disbanding the army/ DF and see how fast the threats rack up. (incidentally there should be a special forum set up to arm people like us for these arguments on ICUN's board in the near future).
    Aidan I'd expect yoou of all people to understand the importance of a symbolic air defence, it means simply that Ireland is willing to defend it's airspace and to restrict it's use by others...it puts a very firm stop to people who might wish to manipulate loopholes to their advantage (and thats more than just military threats you're heading off), also the question of heading off an air campaign against the state, think of how few countries could muster that sort of force projection, a squadron of reasonably capable fighter types that are enough to stand a chane against improvised or low capability aircraft (such as might be made stolen in the event of a NI meltdown scenario) or tackle on any stragglers who got through other countries air defences would be of practical value.
    "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

  17. #17
    Commandant Come-quickly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    2,753
    Post Thanks / Like
    HAWK 200

    The Hawk 200 is a single-seat, lightweight multi-role combat aircraft for air defence and ground attack missions. On air defence missions, the Hawk 200 can attain two hours on patrol 100nm from base when fitted with underwing fuel tanks. In a close air support role, the Hawk 200 has a radius of action of over 100nm. For the interdiction role, Hawk 200 can deliver 2,000lb of ordnance at a range of nearly 300nm when fitted with external fuel tanks. The range can be extended by air-to-air refueling.

    WEAPONS

    The Hawk 200 has eleven external store points with four underwing pylons, an under-fuselage pylon, and wingtip air-to-air missile stations. The range of external stores includes air-to-air missiles, a gunpod, rocket launchers, reconnaissance pod, retarded and free-fall bombs up to 1,000lb, runway cratering, anti-personnel and light armour bombs, cluster bombs, practice bomb and rocket carriers and external fuel tanks.

    The electronic warfare systems include a radar warning receiver and automatic or manually operated chaff and flare dispensers.

    SENSORS

    The Hawk 200 is equipped with a Northrop Grumman APG-66H multi-mode radar, LINS 300 ring laser gyroscope inertial navigation system, air data sensor, display processor and mission computer. The systems are interconnected by dual redundant digital bus. The radar has ten air-to-surface and ten air-to-ground modes for navigation fixing and weapon aiming.

    COCKPIT

    The pilot has a Hands On Throttle and Stick (HOTAS) control system and a wide-field-of-view Head Up Display (HUD). The pilot can select the weapons and release mode prior to initiating an attack by using the weapon control panel, which controls the stores management system.

    The cockpit has a colour display, with a dedicated processor and 15-colour graphics symbology generator. 27 display formats provide flight and aircraft data.

    ENGINE

    The Hawk 200 is powered by an Adour 871 twin-spool, low bypass ratio turbofan engine from Rolls-Royce. The flexible fuel tanks are installed in the fuselage and compartmented integral tanks are located in the wings. External tanks can also be carried on the inboard underwing pylons.

    Click here for printable version


    The Hawk has accumulated more than 750,000 flying hours.


    The current export trainer version of the Hawk, the 60 series, is a development of the earlier export 50 series.


    The Hawk 100 is an advanced two-seat weapons systems trainer with enhanced ground attack capability.


    The single-seat Hawk 200 is a highly capable lightweight fighter aircraft.


    Hawk activating its rocket launchers.


    The Hawk 100 avionic system, including laser Inertial Navigation Unit, Head-up Display/Weapon Aiming Computer and Air Data Sensor.


    A fully automatic Martin-Baker Mk. 10 LH rocket-assisted ejection seat allows escape at all altitudes and speeds within the aircraft's flight envelope.


    The Hawk 200 is powered by an Adour 871 twin-spool, low bypass ratio turbofan engine from Rolls-Royce.





    Advanced Technologies & Engineering Co. (PTY) Ltd - Avionics and Weapon Systems for Military Aircraft (Aircraft, Upgrades and Completions)
    Airtechnology Group - Fans, Fan Heaters, Motors and Generators and Switches and Sensors (HVAC, Fans and Blowers)
    Aviation Spares International Ltd - Military Aircraft and Helicopter Spares (Aircraft Maintenance, Spares and Ground Support)
    AVITRONICS - EW Self Protection Systems for Airborne Platforms (Countermeasures, Electronic Warfare and Decoys)
    CAE - Military Training Systems and Services (Training and Simulation)
    eNGENUITY Technologies Inc - Software Tools for Simulation (Training and Simulation)
    Filtronics Components Ltd - Microwave Subsystems (Countermeasures, Electronic Warfare and Decoys)
    General Dynamics United Kingdom Limited - Integrated Avionic and Defense Computing Systems (IT, Computing and Software)
    Goodrich Hella Aerospace Lighting Systems - Aircraft Lighting Systems (Landing Aids, Guidance and Lighting)
    Heim Systems GmbH - Data Acquisition Hardware (Electronics, Subsystems and Components)
    Horizon - Ground Training by the Royal Air Force (Training and Simulation)
    Mercury Computer Systems - High Performance Real Time MultiComputers (IT, Computing and Software)
    Oxley Avionics - Night Vision Lighting Equipment (Cockpit, Head-up and Helmet Displays)
    Reutech Defence Industries (RDI) - Aircraft Bombs and Fuzes (Air-Launched Weapons, Launchers and Mountings)
    Reutech Defence Industries (RDI) - Airborne and Ground Communications (Communications, Navigation and Identification)


    "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

  18. #18
    Commandant Come-quickly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    2,753
    Post Thanks / Like
    Country of Origin: South Korea Current Status: In Development


    Although increasingly well known for it's ships, cars and consumer electronics goods, South Korea also possesses a thriving aerospace industry. An industry which cut its teeth on component manufacture and licenced production has now produced its second Korean-designed aircraft, the T-50 Golden Eagle. That this aircraft should be a supersonic combat aircraft demonstrates the breadth of South Korea's capability and the extent of its ambition.
    Korean Air Lines (KAL) was the first company in South Korea to be involved in aerospace, establishing facilities in 1979 to carry out depot level maintenance of USAF aircraft based in South Korea and the Pacific. Daewoo, Hyundai and Samsung established similar capabilities soon afterwards. In 1981, KAL was contracted to assemble the Northrop F-5E Tiger IIs ordered by the Republic of Korea Air Force (RoKAF). Korean industry subsequently won contracts to produce a wide range of components and sub-assemblies for Airbus, Boeing, Bombardier and Lockheed Martin - amongst others - and won praise for the high quality of workmanship evident in the delivered items. In 1988, development of South Korea's first locally-designed aircraft, the Daewoo KT-1 Woong-Bee was initiated. This PC-9 look-alike turboprop trainer first flew in 1991 and entered service with the RoKAF in 2000. In the meantime, Samsung was awarded prime contractor status in the Korean Fighter Programme, under which 108 F-16s were licenced-built for the RoKAF. The contract specified extensive technology transfer to Korean industry, resulting in the last 72 aircraft being wholly built in South Korea.
    In 1992, initial design studies were launched by South Korea's Defence Development Agency and Samsung into the development of an indigenous jet trainer/light attack aircraft to replace the T-38, Hawk and F-5 in RoKAF service. The designation KTX-2 (Korean Trainer, Experimental 2) was assigned to the project. Substantial input into the design was made by General Dynamics (later taken over by Lockheed Martin) under the offset agreement negotiated for the F-16 contract.
    In mid 1995 the basic external layout was agreed, but the project stalled at the end of the year as the gathering Asian Financial Crisis mean that available government funding could not now cover the remainder of the project - a foreign partner was essential to carry on. Several major aerospace companies showed interest, but none proved willing to invest their own money. Eventually, Lockheed Martin took the decision to upgrade its existing involvement from that of design consultant to full partner. On 3 July 1997, the South Korean government approved continuation of the project. Later in July, Lockheed Martin signed a formal agreement with Samsung under which it took responsibility for the Fly-By-Wire flight control system, avionics integration, wing design and supply of the APG-167 radar.
    In October 1997, the contract to build and test six prototypes was received - including two static test airframes. Detailed design was now able to proceed rapidly and in August 1999 the external shape of the KTX-2 was frozen, allowing manufacturing drawings to start being released.
    As part of the country's economic reforms, Korean Aerospace Industries Ltd (KAI) was formed in October 1999 from the amalgamation of the aerospace divisions of Samsung, Daewoo and Hyundai. The other major South Korean aerospace manufacturer, Korean Air Lines remained outside of the main industry grouping.
    In February 2000 it was announced that the KTX-2 had been renamed the T-50/A-50 Golden Eagle. The T-50 Golden Eagle designation being applied to an Advanced Jet Training variant, and A-50 Golden Eagle to an armed Light Attack/Fighter Lead In Trainer variant. Final assembly of the first T-50 prototype began on 15 January 2001, and it was formally rolled out on 31 October 2001. The maiden flight was achieved on 20 August 2002, with flight testing continuing until mid 2005.
    The Golden Eagle bears a close resemblance to the F-16 - not really surprising when you consider its origins and the intended role of training RoKAF pilots to fly the F-16 - although it is actually about 80% the size of an F-16. Several design features are shared with its bigger brother, the most noticeable of which is the blended mid-set wing, complete with leading edge root extensions (LERX) and rear 'shelf' fairings ending in F-16-style split airbrakes. Sweepback is only applied to the wing leading edge, and missile launch rails are located at the wing tips. In a departure from F-16 influence, the engine air intakes are located at the fuselage sides, just below the wing LERX in a similar manner to those on the F/A-18.
    The two crew sit in a tandem stepped cockpit equipped with two large Multi-Function Displays (MFDs), a modern wide-angle Head-Up Display (HUD) and full hands on throttle and stick (HOTAS) controls. The Lead In Fighter Trainer and Attack variants will be equipped with a Lockheed Martin APG-167 radar in the nose and a M61 20 mm cannon in the port wing root. The incorporation of many of the latest-technology but 'off the shelf' components and systems within the design is intended to deliver a capable but efficient, reliable and easy to maintain aircraft.
    The Golden Eagle already has a production order for 50 T-50 trainers and 44 A-50 Fighter Lead In trainers from the RoKAF. Further domestic orders may follow, to allow replacement of the F-5 and F-4 in RoKAF service. The type also has obvious export potential - particularly among the ever growing number of F-16 operators. It's manoeuvrability and advanced systems are designed to prepare future pilots to fly the next generation fighters such as the Eurofighter Typhoon, Dassault Rafale and Lockheed Martin F-35, while its combat capability allows dual-role adaptability. Potential rivals, such as the EADS Mako and Aermacchi M-346 have yet to secure any orders, while the class-leading but slow-selling BAE SYSTEMS Hawk may have reached the limit of its development potential. With the marketing clout of Lockheed Martin behind it, the future of the Golden Eagle is sure to be bright.


    "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

  19. #19
    Commandant Come-quickly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    2,753
    Post Thanks / Like

    Source: Flug revue (http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRTypen/FRM-346.htm)

    Aermacchi M-346
    Type (Muster)
    Advanced and lead-in fighter trainer and light combat aircraft (Fortgeschrittenen-Jettrainer und leichtes Kampfflugzeug)
    Country (Land)
    Italy (Italien)

    Manufacturer (Hersteller)
    Aermacchi
    Via Ing. P. Foresio 1
    21040 Venegono
    Italy

    Phone: 0039-331/813-111
    Fax: 0039-331/813-152



    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    General (Allgemeine Angaben)
    Crew (Besatzung): 2
    Weapons (Bewaffnung): The M-346 will feature four underwing hardpoint under auch wing and one under the fuselage, carrying items like

    580 litre auxiliary tank (3)
    Mk.82, Mk.83, Mk.84 bombs
    GBU-12, GBU-16 laser guided bombs
    Mk. 20 Rockeye cluster bomb
    BL-755 cluster bomb
    Durandal anti-runway bomb
    rocket launchers
    AIM-9 Sidewinder (4)
    AGM-65 Maverick (4)
    Brimstone anit-armour missile (4)
    30 mm Defa gun pod
    Vicon 18 photo recce pod
    ELT 555 ECM pod
    Power plant (Antrieb): 2 x ITEC (Honeywell) F124-GA-200 turbofan with FADEC
    Thrust (Schub): 2 x 2385 kp (6250 lbs)
    Specific fuel consumption (spezifischer Krafstoffvervrauch): 0,81 kg/h/kp

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dimensions (Abmessungen)
    Length (Länge): 11,49 m
    Height (Höhe): 4,76 m
    Span (Spannweite): 9,72 m
    Wing area (Flügelfläche): 23,52 sq m

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Weights (Massen)
    Empty weight (Leermasse): 4625 kg
    Max. weapons load (max. Waffenlast): 3000 kg
    Max. fuel (Max. Kraftstoff): 1950 kg
    Normal take-off weight, training (Normale Startmasse, Trainer): 6700 kg
    Max. take-off weight, with weapons (max. Startmasse, bewaffnet): 9500 kg

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Performance (Flugleistungen)
    Max. level speed (max. Horizontalgeschwindigkeit): 1983 km/h (585 KTAS) at 5000 ft
    Stall speed (Überziehgeschwindigkeit): 167 km/h (90 KCAS)
    Max climb rate (max. Steigrate): 20000 ft/min
    Service ceiling (Dienstgipfelhöhe): 13715 m (45000 ft)
    Take-off ground run (Startrollstrecke): 280 m
    Landing ground roll (Landerollstrecke): 590 m
    Range (Reichweite): 1890 km (1020 NM)
    Ferry range (Überführungsreichweite): 2540 km (1370 NM) with two drop tanks
    Max. sustained turn rate (Wenderate): 14,2 deg/sec
    g-limits: + 8 / - 3 g
    Service life (Lebensdauer): 10000 flight hours

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Costs (Kosten)
    In mid-2001, Aermacchi was talking of a price below 15 million US-Dollars.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Customers (Kunden)
    None yet. A potential candidate is the Italian Air Force.
    Aermacchi sees a market for 600 new tainers in the next 30 years, as the majority of advanced trainers like Hawk and Alpha Jet grow older.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Competitors (Konkurrenz)
    EADS Mako
    RSK MiG MiG-AT
    Yakovlev Yak-130

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Remarks (Bemerkungen)
    The M-346 is promoted as a new generation advanced and lead-in fighter trainer, designed to be superior to all existing products in its class and to specifically meet the training requirements for the transition to the new generation high performance combat aircraft. It is a fully westernized development fo the Yak/AEM-130, which functioned as a proof of concept flight demonstrator. Changes include not only the equipment, but the new aircraft is smaller as well and many details are simpler.
    The M-346 will offer a high manoeuvrability with AoA over 40 deg. The modern cockpit environment will feature colour displays. Low maintenance costs are also offered, claims Aermacchi.
    Aermacchi has selected a number of risk sharing partners/suppliers, like:
    ITEC (Honeywell): F124 engine
    Alenia Difesa: avionics core system /HuD and three LCDs in each cockpit, mission processor)
    Teleavio/Marconi Italiana / BAE Systems: fly-by-wire system
    Dowty/Microtecnica: control surfaces actuation
    Honeywell: INS (laser/GPS)
    Microtecnica: hydraulic system
    Microturbo: secondary power system
    Martin Baker/SICAMB: Mk.16 ejection seat
    ASE: electrical generators
    Liebherr: nose landing gear
    Secondo Mona: fuel system

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    History (Geschichte)
    For many years, Aermacchi collaborated with Yakovlev in tests of the Yak/AEM-130, but due to funding constraints and different priorities in Russia decided to go it alone and rework the design to western standards. This "commitment" was announced at the Farnborough air show in July 2000, where the designation M-346 was introduced and the engine selection made public. At that time Aermacchi said it wants to push ahead at the fastest pace possible. A first flight in mid-2002 and deliveries in 2005 were foreseen.
    A full scale mock-up was shown at the Paris Air Show in June 2001, revealing details like the rounded nose and in-flight refuelling probe. At that time, jigs for the wing were in place and fuselage jigs were expected to follow in a few months.
    Funding is provided by the company plus some research money from the Italian government.
    It will be interesting to see how the programme progresses if Alenia and thus Aermacchi enter into an EMAC joint company with EADS, which is promoting its Mako.
    For now, the first M-346 is scheduled to fly by June 2003. The Italian Air Force will be in charge for certification. Deliveries are possible from 2006, it was said at the Paris Air Show in June 2001.
    "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

  20. #20
    Commandant Come-quickly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    2,753
    Post Thanks / Like
    EADS (Dasa) Mako
    Type (Muster)
    Supersonic jet-trainer and lightweight fighter (überschallschneller Strahltrainer und leichter Jäger/Jagdbomber)
    Country (Land)
    Germany (Deutschland)

    Manufacturer (Hersteller)
    EADS Military Aircraft
    Postfach 801160
    81663 München
    Germany

    Phone: 0049-89/607-23912
    Fax: 0049-89/607-22452



    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    General (Allgemeine Angaben)
    Crew (Besatzung): 2 in tandem or 1
    Weapons (Bewaffnung): As a light combat aircraft, Mako could have an internally-mounted 27 mm gun. It features seven external stations (wingtips, fuselage, two under each wing) for a wide variety of weapons, like:

    4 x AIM-9, IRIS-T or ASRAAM
    4 x AMRAAM, FMRAAM or Mica
    12 x Mk.82 bombs
    8 x Mk.83 bombs
    4 x GBU 16
    3 x GBU 24
    5 x AGM-65 Maverick
    2 x anti-ship missile
    4 x rocket pods
    1 x recce pod
    2 x standoff missiles (Taurus class)
    3 x 1250 litre external tanks
    Power plant (Antrieb): 1 x turbofan engine (possibly Eurojet EJ200 variant or General Electric F404 or Snecma M88)
    Thrust (Schub): 1 x 75 kN (17000 lbs) in trainer variant or 90 kN (20200 lbs) in light combat aircraft version

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dimensions (Abmessungen)
    Length (Länge): 13,75 m
    Heigth (Höhe): 4,5 m
    Span (Spannweite): 8,25 m (without wingtip missiles)
    Wing area (Flügelfläche): 25 sq m

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Weights (Massen)
    Empty weight (Leermasse): 5800 kg for the trainer and 6200 kg for the light combat variant (earlier figures were around 5400 kg or 5900 kg as light combat aircraft)
    Weapons load (Waffenzuladung): 4500 kg
    Fuel (Krafstoff): 3000 kg in trainer, 3300 kg in LCA
    Design take-off weight (Startmasse): maybe 8100 kg in trainer configuration (was 7630 kg earlier), and 9400 to a maximum of 13000 kg as LCA (the latter was earlier said to be 9170 kg)

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Performance (Flugleistungen)
    Max. speed (max. Fluggeschwindigkeit): Mach 1.5
    Ceiling (Dienstgipfelhöhe): 15250 m
    Take-off distance (Startstrecke): less than 450 m
    Landing distance (Landestreck): 750 m
    Range (Reichweite): over 2000 NM (3700 km)
    g-Limits: +9/-3
    Maintenance man-hours/flight hour (Wartungs-Mannstunden pro Flugstunde): 3,1

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Costs (Kosten)
    Development and flight test with three prototpyes was estimated at 2 billion DM in mid-1999. Price should be 22 to 25 million US-Dollars.
    Earlier, in the autumn of 1997, development costs were estimated at 1,35 billion US-Dollars and a target unit price of 16 to 20 million US-Dollars was mentioned.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Customers (Kunden)
    None yet.
    Since late 1999, EADS has a Memorandum of Understanding with the air force of the United Arab Emirates for joint studies on the Mako. This was extended in February 2001.
    Earlier EADS (formerly Dasa) had tried to interest South Africa as well as the German Luftwaffe, which at the moment has no requirement. It was also active in South Korea, together with Hyundai.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Competition (Konkurrenten)
    Aermacchi M-346
    Korean Aerospace T-50 Golden Eagle (Samsung KTX-2)
    Yakovlev Yak-130

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Remarks (Bemerkungen)
    EADS (formerly Dasa) is currently studying an advanced trainer/light fighter, for which type of aircraft it sees a world market of 2500 aircraft over 25 yeras, starting in 2005.
    The Mako concept (until mid-1998 known as AT-2000) includes extensive use of composite materials, fly-by-wire controls, modular avionics and cockpits with state-of-the art colour multifunction displays. Also, the aircraft would possess a degree of stealth, due to its shaping. Life-cylce costs would be minimised.
    A whole family of Makos could be developed, spanning the spectrum from a trainer without radar to one- or two-seat recce versions to a single-seat lightweight fighter.
    EADS and the UAE Air Force and Air Defence are actively seeking partners and suppliers for the Mako, which for the time being are not getting exclusive deals. Among the companies signed up by June 2001 are:
    APPH Precision Hydraulics (Landing gear and hydraulic system)
    BAE Systems Controls (flight control computers, utility control system, flight control actuation)
    BGT/Diehl (flight control computers, mission computers, self-defence systems, training aids)
    Computing Devices (mission computer, displays and controls, stores control system)
    Eurojet/MTU (EJ200 engine)
    FHL (flight control system actuation)
    General Electric (GE414 engine)
    Honeywell (environmetal control system, lighting, life-support system, navigation, hydraulics, secondary power system)
    Snecma group (M88-2 engine, landing gear, gearbox, APU, brakes, wheels, filters)

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    History (Geschichte)
    The original concept for the Mako (previously known as AT-2000) stretches back to 1989 and a joint Dornier/Aermacchi study into future trainer requirements. These contacts later dissolved and Dasa was working on advanced trainer concepts alone. News of the programme first broke at the Seoul Airshow in October 1996. At that time, it was even said that work on a prototype could begin in 1997 for a first flight in 2000.
    At the beginning of 1998, Dasa (now EADS) did a fair amount of analytical and wind-tunnel work concerning the new supersonic trainer. Radar cross-section tests were also conducted, with very good results (1 sq m at 45 km).
    Dasa did cooperate with Hyundai of South Korea and Denel Aviation of South Africa, two countries in which it saw a requirement for a total of 150 new trainers and perhaps 100 more lead-in fighters. First deliveries were then envisaged for 2005.
    Denel built a full-scale mock-up, first shown at the Airshow Africa in April/Mai 1998 to push the AT-2000 for South Africas advanced light fighter competition. This was eventually won in November 1998 by the Saab JAS 39 Gripen.
    In South Korea, Dasa had signed a memorandum of understanding with Hyundai in October 1998, but there was always the problem that Samsungs KTX-2, in which Lockheed Martin cooperates, did have firm government backing. Also, the merger of nearly all aerospace companies of the country did go ahead.
    Further complications did arise late in 1998 with the planned but cancelled BAe/Dasa merger, with British Aerospace less than eager to have competition for the Gripen and Hawk.
    This led Dasa to go to a so called "consolidation phase", but with studies continuing and new efforts to interest potential customers and win partners both among prime contractors and systems comapanies to supply avionics, engines etc. The full-scale mock-up was shown at Paris in June 1999.
    Late in 1999, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed with the air force of the United Arab Emirates concerning a possible co-operation on the programme. This was renewed in February 2001 at the IDEX show. At that time, there were also some MoUs with potential suppliers, like Computing Devices, GE Aircraft Engines, Honeywell and MTU.
    At the Paris Air Show in June 2001, EADS did show a fully functioning Mako Cockpit Demonstrator to acquaint interested parties in its modern avionic philosophies. The rear cockpit was a Virtual Reality design with helmet mounted display and data glove to try out alternative layouts. Also at Paris, five more MoUs with potential suppliers were signed (APPH Precision Hydraulics, BAE Systems, BGT/Diehl, FHL, Snecma).
    The launch of the prototype development is now envisaged for the Dubai Air Show in November 2001, with the aim to fly a first Mako prototype in 2005. Production aircraft could then be available in 2008/2009, over a year later than previously thought.
    "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

  21. #21
    Commandant Come-quickly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    2,753
    Post Thanks / Like

    F-5E's upgraded to S standard

    Before the upgrade After the upgrade
    Flight performance data

    Read through the numerous dials and switches from the control panel. Read through the Heads Up Display (HUD), allowing pilot to keep his focus to the front.
    Position determination

    Use of printed maps, compass and ground control information. Inertial Navigation System automatically computes the position with error margin of 0.8 nautical miles per hour.
    Weapons selection

    Involves taking hands off the controls and flipping the switches. Selection through buttons located on control and throttle sticks. Buttons also used for selection of screen displays.
    Weapons accuracy

    Dependant on pilot's judgement and experience. Computer calculations ensure greater accuracy.
    Mission plans

    Scribbled on note pads and changes had to be done manually by pilots in mid-air. Done on computer and fed into the aircraft's computer through a cartridge.
    Digitised maps can be downloaded and displayed on the screens making mid-flight changes easier.
    Back-up instruments

    No back-ups. Two computers and one serving as back-up due to larger space for back-up instruments and fuel level gauges. Ensure fail-safe reliability and higher mission success rate.
    Last edited by Come-quickly; 21st April 2003 at 16:50.
    "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

  22. #22
    Tim Horgan Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    wha? We are doing what now?


    Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

  23. #23
    Gunner Al
    Guest
    no way im reading all that!!!!

  24. #24
    6-40509-04014-7 yooklid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Right behind you.....
    Posts
    2,921
    Post Thanks / Like
    CQ

    What are the unit costs?
    Meh.

  25. #25
    6-40509-04014-7 yooklid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Right behind you.....
    Posts
    2,921
    Post Thanks / Like
    Originally posted by Turkey
    Yooklid,could you get hold of the AMARC inventory,
    Give me a half decent laptop and broadband and I can do anything

    :flagwave:

    [without getting into trouble
    NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Of course only if I am caught (hahahah) - Pure bullshit of course. I have trouble getting around the internet most times

    this link may satiate you sir

    http://www.amarcexperience.com/Default.asp
    Last edited by yooklid; 21st April 2003 at 22:18.
    Meh.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Fighters over Shannon
    By EagleEye in forum Air Corps
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 1st May 2003, 22:15

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •